Lucio Muñoz

A "circular" society of polluters implies the concept of a circular economy, which opposes the linear model of "take-make-throw". Here's how the circular economy can contribute to sustainability.

1. Reduction of waste

Example: Instead of producing new products, old products are refurbished or recycled. For example, the company "Patagonia" repairs and sells used clothes, which reduces the total amount of textile waste.

2. Reuse of resources

Example: In building construction, materials such as steel and wood are reused in new projects. The Circular Building project in London uses modular components that can be easily dismantled and reused.

3. Using renewable resources

Example: By using renewable sources of energy (solar, wind), society reduces its dependence on fossil fuels. For example, companies like Tesla create electric cars that use renewable energy.

4. Economy of action

Example : Instead of buying products, consumers rent or share resources. Platforms such as "Airbnb" and "Lime" enable delegation and minimize the need to produce new products.

5. Design for longevity

Example: Products are designed to be easier to repair and upgrade. The Fairphone company produces mobile phones that are easy to manage and upgrade, extending their lifespan.

6. Reducing the impact on the environment

Example: By investing in technologies that reduce emissions and pollution, such as biological filters or water recycling systems, societies can significantly reduce their negative impact on the environment.

The circular economy offers a model that minimizes waste, maximizes the use of resources and encourages sustainable practices. Instead of exploiting and wasting resources, they are maximized in a closed loop, which can lead to a sustainable society. Such a transformation requires a change in thinking, policy and actual practical applications in everyday life.

Unless recycling of materials reaches 100% ultimately this is not sustainable. Of course, it does make a difference if we run out of one or more resources in 10 years without recycling or 10,000 years with it. If we attain additional sources, say from asteroid mining, this could prolong the process till the matter becomes moot due to the extinction of the human race, even the expansion of the sun into a red giant.

Dragan, I appreciate your comment, but it is mindblogging to me if you think that the sustainability issues created since 1776 by Adam Smith's market and thinking was because of pollution production linearity no pollution production circularity when as you may know or should know, Adam Smith's market IS CIRCULAR, but by assumption only.

Are you telling me that the WCED 1987 got it wrong, the solution to the linear pollution production problem of Adam Smith's traditional market they documented was not sustainable development, but the same Adam Smith's market BUT CIRCULAR?

Are you saying that UNCSD 2012 Rio + 20 got it wrong, no need to go to green markets or dwarf green markets at all as going economic pollution circularity solve the pollution linearity problem?

Is not the circular economy the same business as usual(pollution production markets, but circular(pollution production markets), and hence contrary to the WCED 1987 call in "our common future" to leave traditional economic thinking behind if we wanted to solve the sustainability problems it has created and that they documented?.

Do you know why the traditional market has broken social and/or environmental circularity? And if you know that, then you can see how you can make it circular in ways consistent with WCED 1987 request of going beyond traditional market thinking, not by status quo paradigm double down to survive in ways contrary to Thomas Kuhn's paradigm evolution loop.

Defining a traditional market linear pollution production problem in practice circular does not solve the pollution production problem we have been trying to address since WCED 1987 AS THE ROOTCAUSE GENERATING THE PROBLEM IS NOT FIXED YET so while economic circularity takes place pollution production without a direct link to that economic circularity will continue to take place,....and hence, a link from traditional economic circularity to the need to transition to the clean economy one day does not exist as circular market operate under permanent market failure...and sooner or later as Kuhn's expectations materialize we will see a system collapse under circularity.

I am not here to convert anybody, just to share ideas and in that spirit I have openly shared these comments with you Dragan, JUST SAYING CIRCULAR IS BETTER without addressing the problem embedded in both linearity and circularity does not cut it in my view.

I appreciate your comment.

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

Neil, thank you for taking the time to comment,

This is a question designed for a simple answers of how a linear problem can stop being problem if we define it circular so the question is:

If a linearly polluting society is not sustainable, how can a circularity polluting society be sustainable?

Do you have a view on how this can be possible?

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

Some of you may find these articles, related to the ideas behind this question, keep in mind that are paradigm double downs and paradigm shifts when reading, which I share here in good faith, to exchange ideas.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2024. Sustainability thoughts 194: How can we show that the sustainable development solutions to the socio-environmental sustainability problem created by traditional market thinking by 1987 are both partial and without clear priority solutions?,In: International Journal of Education Humanities and Social Science(IJEHSS), ISSN: 2582-0745, May-June, Vol. 7, Issue 3, Pp. 6-17, India.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380396914_Sustainability_thoughts_194_How_can_we_show_that_the_sustainable_development_solutions_to_the_socio-environmental_sustainability_problem_created_by_traditional_market_thinking_by_1987_are_both_partial

Muñoz, Lucio, 2024. Sustainability thoughts 195: Understanding the road from sustainable development thinking to green market paradigm shift avoidance 1987-2022: What are the implications of this?, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 18, Nº 6, La Paz, Bolivia.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/380936997_Sustainability_thoughts_195_Understanding_the_road_from_sustainable_development_thinking_to_green_market_paradigm_shift_avoidance_1987-2022_What_are_the_implications_of_this

Muñoz, Lucio, 2024. Sustainability thoughts 193: Does the current move from the period of green market paradigm shift avoidance 1987-2022 to formal circular economic thinking 2023-2024 make sense in terms of long-term environmental sustainability? If not, why not?, In: International Journal of Education Humanities and Social Science(IJEHSS), ISSN: 2582-0745, May-June, Vol. 7, Issue 3, Pp. 566-578, India.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381608790_Sustainability_thoughts_193_Does_the_current_move_from_the_period_of_green_market_paradigm_shift_avoidance_1987-2022_to_formal_circular_economic_thinking_2023-2024_make_sense_in_terms_of_long-term_env

Muñoz, Lucio, 2024. Sustainability thought 178: Environmental pollution management markets versus environmental pollution reduction markets: Which one is environmentally clean economy transition friendly? Why?, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 18, Nº 7, La Paz, Bolivia.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381698009_Sustainability_thought_178_Environmental_pollution_management_markets_versus_environmental_pollution_reduction_markets_Which_one_is_environmentally_clean_economy_transition_friendly_Why

Muñoz, Lucio, 2024. Sustainability thought 181: Dwarf green markets versus green markets: Which one is environmentally clean economy transition friendly? Why? In: Sumerianz Journal of Business Management and Marketing, ISSN(e): 2617-0175, ISSN(p): 2617-1724, Vol. 7, No. 3, Pp. 58-65.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384329066_Sustainability_thought_181_Dwarf_green_markets_versus_green_markets_Which_one_is_environmentally_clean_economy_transition_friendly_Why

Muñoz, Lucio, 2024. Sustainability thoughts 187: If markets were optimal in 1776, then where did the 1987 overpopulation problem come from? Can the dependency theory and the golden trojan paradigm theory explain this?, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 18, Nº 7, La Paz, Bolivia.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382361027_Sustainability_thoughts_187_If_markets_were_optimal_in_1776_then_where_did_the_1987_overpopulation_problem_come_from_Can_the_dependency_theory_and_the_golden_trojan_paradigm_theory_explain_this

My position is as follows: The main difference between linear and circular pollution lies in how society manages resources and waste. Linear pollution implies a "take, make, throw" model, where resources are exploited and waste is discarded without reuse. This model leads to resource depletion and increased pollution, which is not sustainable.

On the other hand, circular pollution, in the context of a circular economy, implies a system in which resources are used and recycled. This means that waste is minimized and that existing materials are returned to the production cycle. In this way, society can:

Recycle and Reuse: Instead of ending up in a landfill, waste can be reused in new products. Reduce resource consumption: By using renewable resources and more efficient technologies, society reduces its impact on the environment. Creates innovation: The development of new technologies and methods of waste management can contribute to a more sustainable model.

In this sense, circular pollution can be sustainable if it is properly managed and if society adopts strategies that minimize the impact on the environment. It all depends on how resources are managed and how much effort is put into innovation and sustainable practices.

While a circular economy has the potential to reduce waste and promote sustainable resource use, it is not a guaranteed solution to sustainability challenges. It must be implemented thoughtfully, considering its broader environmental impacts, and integrated with other sustainable practices to ensure it contributes positively to ecological health and social well-being. This comprehensive approach can work towards a truly sustainable future, moving beyond merely circular or linear paradigms.

Transitioning to a circular economy requires a shift in mindsets and behaviors. If individuals and companies continue to consume at an unsustainable rate, even within a circular model, the overall impact may still be negative. An effective circular economy demands changes in consumer behavior, business practices, and policies to foster sustainable consumption.

Circular processes, such as recycling, can often be energy-intensive. If the energy used in these processes comes from fossil fuels, that could lead to significant carbon emissions, making the idea of circularity less sustainable overall.

It's crucial to consider that sustainability is not just about reducing pollution, but also about social equity, economic viability, and ecosystem health. A circular model must integrate these broader perspectives to be truly sustainable.

Sustainable circularity should be synergistic with other sustainability models, such as regenerative practices, which focus on restoring ecosystems, and principles of social justice, ensuring that the benefits of economic activity are equitably distributed.

Dragan, the whole point is to solve the pollution production problem to create the conditions needed to transition from pollution reduction markets to clean markets....The need to solve that sustainability problem led WCED 1987 to come up with sustainable development thinking....The need to solve the environmental sustainability problem led the UNCSD 2012 to indicate the needs to go green market, green economy and green growth, but later they went array and implemented dwarf green markets, dwarf green economy and dwarf green growth....

Can you tell me how circularity solves the pollution production problem(e,g, environmental pollution problem) embedded in the working of the circular economy that the world has been trying to solve since 1987?. If traditional economic thinking/linear economy/assumed circular is bad for the environment due to environmentally distorted market prices, then traditional economic thinking/circular economy/circular thinking with the same environmentally distorted market prices must be bad for the environment, so the question relates how a bad can be made good by just defining it good it is still bad in practice as the root-cause of bad is still not fixed.

So the question, If a linearly polluting society is not sustainable, how can a circularity polluting society be sustainable?

SO polluting societies, linear or circular, should not be expected to be sustainable in the long run as sustainability deficits will accumulate as the market expands and expands until Thomas Kuhns's conditions come along, and the polluting society tends towards paradigm death and/or shift. The solution to the pollution production problem requires paradigm shift, not status quo paradigm double down.

I appreciate your comment. Let's agree to disagree then.

Respectfully yours;

Lucio

Stephen, the green market is circular, the red market is circular, and the sustainability market is circular, if you want to focus on green economies/environmental sustainability only or red economies/social sustainability only or yellow economies/socio-environmental sustainability, leading to environmentally friendly capitalism/green capitalism or socially friendly capitalism/red capitalism or socio-environmentally friendly capitalism or yellow capitalism. All are ways of thinking away from traditional market linearity or circularity, all are ways of leaving the status quo BEHIND, as the WCED 1987 called for.

Thank you for commenting

Lucio

Dear friends, the following articles have some food for thoughts related to the answer to the question that you may find interesting and you can check them when you have time....Shared with the goal of just exchanging ideas.....

Muñoz, Lucio, 2020.  Sustainability thoughts 101: What was wrong with the structure of Adam Smith’s traditional market model? What are the main implications of this?. Boletin CEBEM-REDESMA, Año 14, No.2, February, La Paz, Bolivia.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339213828_Sustainability_thoughts_101_What_was_wrong_with_the_structure_of_Adam_Smith's_traditional_market_model_What_are_the_main_implications_of_this

Muñoz, Lucio, 2020.  Sustainability thoughts 106: Can we solve an environmental sustainability problem by managing the consequences of that problem? If not, why not?, Boletin CEBEM-REDESMA, Año 14, No.5, May, La Paz, Bolivia.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340442676_Sustainability_thoughts_106_Can_we_solve_an_environmental_sustainability_problem_by_managing_the_consequences_of_that_problem_If_not_why_not

Muñoz, Lucio, 2020.  Sustainability thoughts 109: Linking perfect green market theory to the circular green economy, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 14 Nº 7, La Paz, Bolivia

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341282635_Sustainability_thoughts_109_Linking_perfect_green_market_theory_to_the_circular_green_economy

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021.   Sustainability thoughts 130: Can green economies and green growth exist without green markets? If not, why not? What is the current main development implication of this?, In: International Journal of Management studies and Social Science Research(IJMSSSR),  vol.-3, issue-1, January-February, Pp 50-65, ISSN: 2582 - 0265, India.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346438700_Sustainability_thoughts_130_Can_green_economies_and_green_growth_exist_without_green_markets_If_not_why_not_What_is_the_current_main_development_implication_of_this

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021.  Sustainability thoughts 110: Linking perfect red market theory to the circular red economy, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 15 Nº 1, January, La Paz, Bolivia.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341282804_Sustainability_thoughts_110_Linking_perfect_red_market_theory_to_the_circular_red_economy

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021. Sustainability thoughts 111: Linking perfect sustainability market theory to the circular sustainability based economy, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 15 Nº 2, February, La Paz, Bolivia.

Muñoz, Lucio, 2021. Sustainability thoughts 123: How are green market paradigm shift knowledge gaps created from the pure capitalism angle? In which ways can they lead to the mishandling of the expected paradigm shift from pure capitalism to environmentally friendly capitalism?, In: International Journal of Management studies and Social Science Research(IJMSSSR),  Vol. 3, Issue 2, March-April, Pp 63-75, ISSN: 2582-0265, India.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343470915_Sustainability_thoughts_123_How_are_green_market_paradigm_shift_knowledge_gaps_created_from_the_pure_capitalism_angle_In_which_ways_can_they_lead_to_the_mishandling_of_the_expected_paradigm_shift_from

Muñoz, Lucio, 2024.   Sustainability thought 181: Dwarf green markets versus green markets: Which one is environmentally clean economy transition friendly? Why? In: Sumerianz Journal of Business Management and Marketing, ISSN(e): 2617-0175, ISSN(p): 2617-1724, Vol. 7, No. 3, Pp. 58-65.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/384329066_Sustainability_thought_181_Dwarf_green_markets_versus_green_markets_Which_one_is_environmentally_clean_economy_transition_friendly_Why